About your Search

20121002
20121010
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
-- in "60 minutes." michael wallace points his finger and says you're a dictator. several times he said that. he laughed. after many years, people thought his approach was very smart. it made michael wallace embarrassed. if you do the same thing with xi jinping, it will be a disaster. we need to know this kind of mindset, this kind of experience. that is why what henry kissinger said early on this important. -- is important. it will shape their point of view and their behavior. there is tremendous room for cooperation but also dangerous. >> i think you said they experienced during the cultural revolution hard in this generation. how does this bear out in how they view domestic policies and -- in china? or is not -- that not a factor? >> we cannot really know how they will perform an office because they are not there yet. there have been instances where people, where china was being criticized and he made a sharp response. i have had several conversations with xi and found him an extraordinarily thoughtful person who raised a number of philosophical questions. the problem they face is if you
of the debate. in 1988, michael dukakis could have had help not looking so cold in his response. >> we have a professor at the george washington university, john sides. when you have those moments that reinforce, either good or for ill, to a candidate, how important or damaging can these be? >> candidate debates in a general election to not move the polls a lot. only in a close race. in general, i think these dramatic moments in debates are not necessarily game changes for the average american voter. >> you wrote, usually the candidates fight to a draw. it is hard in that context to have a stunning victory or a terrible defeat. can you elaborate? >> the candidates spend a lot of time trying to lower their expectations about the performance and portray the other person as this great orator. in reality, the candidates spend a lot of time prepping for the debates and they are very good at it. they have read a lot of material and memorize a lot of material. in that context, it is hard for a candidate to really make a big enough mistake to actually swing opinion too strongly to his opponent. >>
'm going to thank you for coming in turn it over to michael. >> i am the one who knew trevor when he was a lawyer for john mccain which i thought was a very important job. nothing like being a lawyer for stephen colbert. maybe one day i can say i work for comedy central, too. i want to give you a brief overview. at the end of july, we are trying our best to project with the money would come from and what the differences would be in terms of the various sides. the point we're trying to make, one that there is a real difference in political money strategy that they are employing the cycle. the obama campaign is heavily reliant on small dollars, regulated money, contributions under $2,500 from individuals. the campaign has total control over and can spend as they want. the exception your is priorities usa which we were saying maybe would make 60 million earlier. authorities have been saying they wanted to make $100 million. there were not a lot of what the liberal democrats coming forward to give them money. in recent weeks, there has been a little bit of a turnaround. it is nothing com
need to control your health. host: michael is a political science major. >> i will begin with the article that ran on "the nation" frontpage. why have appointments gone by the wayside in this election? guest: president obama has faced obstruction but has not been as engaged with putting forward judges. by the way, the supreme court today may be years 2% of cases in this country. the dog is growing smaller and smaller, shrinking, -- the smaller andgrowing smaller, shrinking, and there is an impact of president obama not pushing as many throughout as bush did. the courts are so important, and they should be discussed in this campaign. i hope in this next debate -- it is important that this has gone under the radar. the presidents are not individual -- not just individuals. they come with advisers. president reagan's nominee robert bork was rejected by the senate for being way out of the mainstream in this country. he did not believe the equal protection clause applies to women. he is opposed to the voting rights act and the silver rights act of 1964. and he believed that co
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4